ArticleJournal of psycholinguistic research2024
Does the Processing Advantage of Formulaic Language Persist in Its Nonadjacent Forms? Evidence from Eye Movements of Chinese Collocations.
Article in Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
It has been well documented that formulaic language (such as collocations; e.g., provide information) enjoys a processing advantage over novel language (e.g., compare information). In natural language use, however, many formulaic sequences are often inserted with words intervening in between the individual constituents (e.g., provided information → provide some of the information). Whether or not the processing advantage persists in nonadjacent forms remains largely unknown. The present study thus sought to address this gap by recording the eye movements of Chinese native speakers when they were reading sentences embedded with formulaic sequences (high frequency collocations) versus novel phrases (low frequency controls), in their adjacent (e.g., 'resolve difficulties' vs. 'experience difficulties'), short-insertion (e.g., 'resolve these difficulties' vs. 'experience these difficulties'), and long-insertion forms (e.g., 'resolved so many difficulties' vs. 'experienced so many difficulties'). Results suggested that the processing advantage for formulaic language over novel language existed not only in their adjacent form, but also in their short-insertion form, albeit the magnitude of the processing advantage diminished with the increase of insertion length. The persistence of FL processing advantage is in line with usage-based approach to language learning, processing, and use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38472548What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.